Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council says conservatives are looking for a candidate who will repeal the nation’s health care law, fight for pro family values and address the national debt.

“Not a lot of time was spent talking about Mitt Romney” Perkins says. He added, “it’s not news” that there’s not a lot of support among conservatives for Romney. Perkins says Romney’s Mormon religion was not discussed among those participating in the meeting.

So what does this mean? Expect conservative groups to start individually motivating their constituents to work for Santorum. Also look for more money and resources to start pouring into Santorum’s campaign. No question about it, this is excellent news for Santorum’s camp and a major blow to the Gingrich and Perry camps.

Who knew God was all worked up about the healthcare bill and the national debt. And when they say “pro family,” they mean gay bashing.

ah, christians, like the very prayerful Speaker of the Kansas state House

“Pray for Obama. Psalm 109:8.” That’s the slogan an email from O’Neal refers to, a phrase that’s become popular in some circles on bumper stickers and other merchandise. The bible passage itself reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” The real controversy arises in the next verse of Psalm 109, however, which continues, “May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow.”
In a message accompanying the email, O’Neal writes:
“At last — I can honestly voice a Biblical prayer for our president! Look it up — it is word for word! Let us all bow our heads and pray. Brothers and Sisters, can I get an AMEN? AMEN!!!!!!”

Every time I hear about one of these guys being up to something, I think “Hmm, scumbag, as I recall…” Then I read about him, and he’s ‘way worse than I ever thought or remembered. And I have a good memory; they just strain credulity.

Going with the K St. goon…
That is impressive! Who would have thought they could bring Jack back? Abramoff of those sweet sweet times when the GOP held all three houses and nothing could stop the flow of ill-gotten gains! Those were the days.
Ricky… Oh this is going to be AWESOME!!!

Looks like the Charge of the Jesus Light Brigade to me. I don’t think they’ll get anywhere until a couple of the anti-Romneys decide that the grift has lasted long enough and they don’t need no more stinkin’ rubber chicken served by Red State zombies.

Conservati­ve evangelical leadership has shown over the years that they are part of the GOP establishm­ent. They undoubtedl­y want Romney to win the nomination­, but they can’t publicly offer their support to him without losing face from their followers. Thus, they offer their support to a candidate who is essentially out of the race, but who will peel off votes from others who might actually have a chance at defeating Romney.

Who knew God was all worked up about the healthcare bill and the national debt. And when they say “pro family,” they mean gay bashing.

The Baby Jeebus believes in capitalism and is against free health care. Do you know how much he charged their family to raise Lazarus from the dead? It’s in the Bibble. David Brooks and Mitt told me so.

This seems to be a little bit of closing the barn door after the horse went to market, or however it goes. If it was so important for them to have an anti-Romney, why did they wait until after Iowa and New Hampshire to finally settle on somebody?

Perkins says Romney’s Mormon religion was not discussed among those participating in the meeting.

That’s probably correct: Romney’s Mormonism probably wasn’t mentioned: it didn’t have to be: for reasons I’m sure we can all imagine.

And not be the downer here, but as retrograde and mockworthy as Mr. Perkins and his merry band of wannabe theocrats might be, the more they organize and get their political act together, the more likely it is that they will be able to leverage that organization into electoral influence on more down-ticket races. The Religious Right may not (or may) be minded to line up behind the Mittbot for the Presidential race, but in terms of state and local races, the approval/endorsement/financial assistance of the Jesus-jumpers may possibly (actually, probably will) ensure an even greater representation for religious fanatics in a lot of polities.

@Kane:
This. I have no doubt they met , settled on Santorum, and issued a press release in about an hour. Now they are on to the real purpose of the confab – running up their expense accounts on fancy hotels, expensive meals, strip clubs, peep shows, call girls and rent boys.

Because they aren’t as organized as they like to make us believe. They watched as one after another “serious” candidates demurred. They didn’t bother to recruit one of their own, or persuade one of those running to be their champion and fund them adequately. Maybe they couldn’t agree on a person, or they tried and was turned down somehow, or they had someone and they dropped out. In any case, they knew Romney had never stopped running for President and had plenty of money to throw around in his quest. He had so much effort and money that he could win by default without someone equal in stature or resources. That they didn’t take it seriously enough is now a problem they can’t really solve.

While South Carolina is strongly evangelical, the evangelicals haven’t taken the time to really make their case to the people they needed to make the case to in order to defeat Romney. But even if Romney loses in SC, he’s the only other person who has the organizational chops to go the distance. And against a very well-funded and organized and already running machine, a last-ditch effort just won’t work. Look at Perry. Perry started way too late and unprepared to run a national race. He may run through his money in ads, but ads alone have never won a Presidential Primary, let alone a Presidential race.

So did the Family Research Council PAC endorse Santorum? Because I think it’s still a no-no for the Family Research Council Action Fund (or whatever their 501( c)4 is called) to endorse a partisan candidate.

And for sure their ( c)3 can’t. Will the IRS investigate?

Probably not. But they damn well should.

If these bastards are spending tax exempt dollars shilling for that ooze, they need to get hauled in to tax court.

Santorum is a genuine true believing religious nut. He has managed to tone it down some during appearances at various MSM venues, but if you listen to his townhall stump speeches, he is the same ole extreme shithead he’s always been. And the closest thing we have to a genuine national level theocrat, with whiffs of a fascist mindset. He is like demorats in the sense that he believes government can be a force for good. If you believe that good is having everyone kowtow to the bible and various radical interpretations of it, of course ministered through vessels of piety like his self.

He is patently unelectable, unless we tumble into a dystopian free for all, and he decides to elect himself, as god would want it, according to Rick Santorum. He could easily be the Will Patton character in The Postman. I think people like Tony Perkins know this full well, and I take this endorsement of surrender to pragmatic efforts to beat President Obama, and going with one of their own to make them feel warm and fuzzy in defeat.

@MikeBoyScout: NICE! I wondered if there’d be something like that in his past. I come from a similar background on my father’s side, and I love exploding the wingnuts’ heads on my mother’s side with the news that those hard-workin’, Medal of Honor winner-spawnin‘, coal-minin’ Italian great-grandparents of mine were honest-to-God sociaIists who had to get out of Italy when it went fascist.

ETA: And also, too, that my grandfather was most likely an anchor baby.

[I posted the comment below at the end of Tim F.’s “…dead horse” thread, before realizing that John Cole had written on the same subject, and this thread still has faint signs of life.]

How heavenly ironic that this conclave of fundamentalist Christian patriarchs has chosen a Papist as their preferred candidate. Santorum’s religious beliefs (and he himself is deeply conservative theologically within that faith) would have been denounced as wicked and idolatrous a generation ago by these same evangelical leaders.

This endorsement should offer some clue as to just how unholy and unworthy they regard Mormons.